"Too long have
the workers of the world waited for some Moses to lead them out of bondage. I
would not lead you out if I could; for if you could be led out, you could be led
back again. I would have you make up your minds
there is nothing that you cannot do for yourselves."—Eugene V Debs,
1905

We all need
some heroes. Gene Debs is one of mine. He was a
popular figure in his day. A leader of railroad workers Debs experienced his
first time in the joint courtesy of a Democrat "friend of labor," President
Grover Cleveland. Cleveland used the army to break the Pullman strike. Having
some time for reflection while sitting in the Woodstock prison Debs reexamined
his ties to the Democrats. Shortly thereafter he became a founding leader of the
Socialist Party.

Debs ran for
President five times. He was selected for these campaigns because he not only
had what today would be called "charisma;" he also was able to use his great
oratorical skills to demystify the workings of capitalism, a great pedagogue as
well as a master agitator.

For Debs
politics was not a contest of personalities or duels of slogans and jingles. He
saw politics clearly for what it is—one component of the struggle between
classes. He used his election campaigns to advance the interests of working
people in this struggle.

Though Debs
was not a religious man evangelists later imitated some of his campaign
successes. Before Billy Graham holds a revival anywhere advance men go in to
talk to the local clergy. They explain how they can steer new converts into the
local congregations. Instead of jealous hostility the revival usually gets warm
support from the locals.

When Debs came
to a town there was almost always a big crowd. Those in attendance would get
emotionally pumped up by this exciting experience. That’s good but Debs made
sure there was more. Everywhere the attempt was made to link up unorganized
workers with local unions. People were asked to join the Socialist Party to
advance the message they had heard from Debs—and thousands did. And the
Socialists never forgot to pass the hat for money because there were no
corporate sponsors.

Debs ran his
last campaign from a prison cell in the Atlanta Penitentiary. He had been sent
there by the administration of another Democrat "friend of labor," Woodrow
Wilson. Debs’ "crime" was a
speech opposing the First World War.

When Debs was
finally released by the Republican Warren Harding, he was in poor health. The
party to which he had devoted everything was decimated by government repression
and ideological splits. The Debs era was over and nothing quite like it has
developed since.

Campaign Train—the Red Special

But the Debs
legacy lives on. There are still some of us who share his assessment of politics
as class struggle. Some of us, like Debs, don’t think the fundamental changes
needed in our society will be accomplished solely through the electoral arena.
It’s impossible for us to compete with the ruling class for campaign funds—not
to mention their domination of mass media, schools, and churches. We can
ill-afford to neglect the bitter lessons of their interventions in Chile and
Nicaragua, to cite just a couple of examples out of many, that prove our rulers
don’t always respect the outcome of elections.

The working
class needs to mobilize around our strengths instead. We are not only the
big majority of society—we also do all the work. Like the line from the song
Solidarity Forever declares, "Without our brain and muscle not
a single wheel can turn!" Our numbers could support huge public meetings and
demonstrations in our communities—in and out of election cycles. Only when we
have prevailed in the workplace and the streets can we think seriously about
asserting ourselves through elections, legislation, constitutional amendments,
etc.

In recent
years those of us in this Debs tradition have seen two political developments
that appeared to have some promise.

The other is
the Green Party.
The Greens have been largely built by issue activists that correctly concluded
their cause would get nowhere in the Democrats. Independent and energetic they
deserve admiration. I encounter them in all the mass movements where they
generally function with distinction.

When Ralph
Nader agreed to run a serious campaign as the Green Party standard bearer some
of us were hopeful. Nader has very good credentials as an advocate for consumer
and citizen rights. He is an impressive speaker. And he had close ties to some
in the labor movement.

This seemed to
me to be the most promising opportunity in decades to have an election campaign
truly independent of the bosses parties, that could educate large numbers of
workers and students, and recruit many of them for ongoing battles. I decided to
support the Nader campaign and helped organize a Labor for Nader committee in
Kansas City.

But our hopes
were only partially fulfilled. Nader made some good speeches to tens of
thousands at enthusiastic rallies across the country. He got more votes than
anybody expected. But that was about it.

The pumped up
crowds at the rallies weren’t steered into the mass movements or even the Green
Party. The campaign was little more than an extended speaking tour for Nader
with some big name entertainers on hand to warm up the crowd. After election day
all the hubbub came to a halt.

The abrupt end
of the campaign was especially unfortunate considering the country was plunged
into the greatest constitutional crisis since the Hayes-Tilden affair. For days
the nation didn’t know who should be the winner or would be the winner. Bitter
liberals denounced Nader, and those of us who supported Nader, as being
responsible for Bush’s election. During this whole period we heard naught a word
from our candidate.

Over the past
three years Nader has mostly gone back to the work he usually does—and does
quite well. But over the past few months he’s taken to commenting on electoral
politics again. First he shared speaking platforms and praise with Dennis
Kucinich, a liberal Cleveland congressman who is making a long-shot bid for the
Democrat nomination for President. More recently Nader has even given kudos to
Democrat front runner Howard Dean.

What gives
here? A central theme of the Nader 2000 campaign was the need to break from the
two establishment parties. Nader stood up well to the pressure during the
campaign and the abuse and ostracism afterwards. Is he now recanting that
position, considering joining liberals seeking to "take back" a mythical
Democrat Party that never existed in the real world? Does he want us to do the
same? How are we to know?

On Christmas
Eve, we open our morning papers to find Nader will definitely not seek the
nomination of the Green Party this time. But, we are to hold tight until some
time in January when he will disclose to us whether or not he plans to run for
President as an independent!

This is
beginning to border on the bizarre. I don’t know of any major changes in the
program of the Green Party since 2000. If Nader has developed any big
differences he hasn’t yet divulged them. What possible reason could there be for
dissing the party that worked so hard for him four years ago?

Clearly Nader
is a one man show who is prepared to shift positions wildly without feeling any
responsibility to any supporters. That’s a political/character trait we were
unaware of last time around. Knowing it today precludes us from supporting Nader
on any ticket.

The Greens
will now face some real challenges. They lack a class perspective and deal with
issues somewhat abstractly. Encouraged by some minor wins here and there, they
have also become preoccupied with a time-tested—and failed—strategy of local
based electoral politics. There is a danger that as they become more successful
in winning elections they may follow their European counterparts into the
political Establishment. We shall see. Whether they pick their lawyer, a former
socialist turned progressive stock broker, a former singer-song writer, or
someone else for their presidential candidate we can’t think of any good reason
to support them over any other protest ticket.

That brings me
back to the other promising development, the Labor Party. While certainly not
explicitly socialist, the Labor Party clearly embraces much of the Debs
tradition. In fact the educational arm of the party is called the
Debs-[Mother]
Jones-[Frederick] Douglass Institute.

The Labor
Party has never fielded any candidates for office and will not be in the 2004
election. The party will be focusing on issue campaigns around
health care
and worker rights. Following the Debs
tradition the Labor Party views workplace and community struggles around issues
to be more important than electoral politics. Such battles, along with a
foundation of union support and mass membership base in the communities, are a
prerequisite for successful election campaigns.

The Labor
Party is still in a fledgling stage—support from unions representing about two
million workers and a few thousand individual members. But it is armed with a
good program, a sound strategy, and a dedicated competent leadership. This
doesn’t guarantee success but—unlike any of the other alternatives out there—it
has a shot at success.

I think we
have to face it: the 2004 election is going to be a grim, lose-lose event for
the working class. But out of the fights around important issues we can build
for a better future.